Moose Jaw Board Of Police Commissioners More Clearly Defined

Modernization can be a good thing and with modernization there often needs to be a change in language to fit the appropriate legislation.

It was in this spirit the City adopted Bylaw No 5599 The Moose Jaw Board Of Police Commissioners as means to adhere to the pertinent provincial legislation. The new bylaw replaces Bylaw No. 4713 Bylaw To Establish Board Of Police Commissioners.

For Moose Jaw members of the Moose Jaw Police Service (MJPS) are not employed by the City of Moose Jaw they are employees of the independent and autonomous Moose Jaw Board Of Police Commissioners. The Chief of Police is responsible to the Board and not Council. The Board, in partnership and/or consultation with the Chief, help develop the budget for the MJPS.

The Board cannot direct the MJPS to investigate certain individuals, their role is to define the areas which need attention and develop budgets for it. Their roles are clearly defined in The Police Act.

Bylaw No. 5599 further clarifies the duties and roles of Council, Board of Police Commissioners and the Chief Of Police.

All municipalities with a population over 5,000 or if they have their own police force must have an independent Board of Police Commissioners.

Discussion

Although the proposed Bylaw was to clean up and clearly define the roles of the Board there was discussions and amendments made to the final Bylaw by Council.

Councillor Brian Swanson moved two amendments to the proposed bylaw.

The first amendment Councillor Swanson proposed was the requirement the two civilian (non-Council) members of the Board of Police Commissioners must be residents of Moose Jaw.

“I am moving the amendment to be a member of the Moose Jaw Board of Police Commissioners you must be a resident of the City of Moose Jaw which I think is appropriate..in the past it has been somewhat of an issue,” Councillor Swanson said. “Our police budget is around $10 million and it is to govern the police of Moose Jaw and I think to do so you must be a resident of the City of Moose Jaw.”

Asked by Councillor Chris Warren if there was any concerns in the legislation about restricting Board membership to residents of Moose Jaw City Clerk/Solicitor Myron Gulka-Teichko said he had not completed much review in that area.

“It is common for other advisory committees that members of those committees be residents of Moose Jaw. I believe the only other body that would not have that requirement would be the Board of Revision,” Gulka-Teichko said. “It is not uncommon (you must be a resident of Moose Jaw) when it comes to other boards and committees.”

Mayor Fraser Tolmie said he agreed with the amendment.

“I think it is important the shareholders and financial decision makers come from this city,” Mayor Tolmie said.

In a unanomous vote the residency requirement amendment was approved.

A second amendment once again came from Councillor Brian Swanson when he asked for a re-wording surrounding where the Moose Jaw Police Services must seek services.

“It is currently stated the City of Moose Jaw shall provide services to the Board that are agreed upon between the Board and City Council and I would like to remove the word shall continue and subnstitute the word may…so we agree the City of Moose Jaw may provide services to the Board upon such terms, he said, adding “I and saying that because shall means igt has to be done but their different services the (Moose Jaw) Police Service has undertaken on their own that use to be provided by the City and in the future they me do so to. Especially if the City’s prices are not competitive.”

One area where this is occuring is in Freedom Of Information requests and there is debate over it, he said.

“I don’t think this changes anything it just allowe the Police Service to seek out other providers of services if they so choose.”

Councillor Warren however disagreed with the amendment.

“The way I kind of look at this there are some shared services and for example I believe human resources and payroll, IT (Information Technology) services that are shared and I think the basis around this whole enhanced bylaw was to create some clear separation between the two parties but also to build a really good bridge between the two,” he said, adding “for services to continue there needs to be an agreement from both sides.”

Councillor Warren said the word shall in the bylaw insures that all parties “take all efforts to work together to find the most effective and efficient way to carry out some of these shared services.”

He said in the end it could have the MJPS hiring their own services which in the end could cost the taxpayers more.

“I like the word shall because it puts the onus on both of these entities to work together,” Councillor Warren said.

The amendment was passed 6 - 1 with Councillor Warren opposed.

The Bylaw passed all three readings unanimously.